Well, for those of you who saw the WGN broadcast (above) on the “gay brothers” research (www.gaybros.com), I’m sure that you were as disappointed as I was at the obvious bias — unless you’re a homosexuality advocate, of course. While I’m glad that WGN invited me on as a critic, I got just 12 seconds compared to three separate on-air segments featuring a pair of homosexual brothers who are part of the experiment.

One of the brothers said he was 100 percent convinced that his homosexuality is genetic. Well, I guess that settles it! “Gay gene” discussions are all about finding an “out” from the historic, Biblical moral prohibition of homosexual practice as sinful.

Actually, the researcher, Dr. Alan Sanders, said the reality is much more complex than than a mere “gay gene” — with a mix of genetic and environmental causes for homosexuality. But he was clearly biased toward emphasizing genetics — and thereby a lack of personal choice and responsibility for homosexual behavior — as a way of promoting its acceptance. (Some on the WGN news team shared Sanders’ bias.)

After watching the segment, I wrote this note to a colleague:

Note the contrast between the researcher [Dr. Sanders] who says [the causation of homosexuality is] a complex combination of genes and environment, and the gay brothers (who of course received inordinate air time) who talk confidently about a “gay gene” and that there was no choice involved. I got 12 seconds and it was the old “science vs. religion” framing of the debate. This story would have been vastly improved by interviewing a social scientist not beholden to or sympathetic with “gay” activism [e.g., someone affiliated with the group National Research and Therapy of Homsoexuality, www. narth.com].

A couple of liberal friends couldn’t see the bias in the WGN news report [see YouTube video above] on a molecular genetic study of “sexual orientation.” … Funded by the National Institutes of Health, researchers from the Evanston Northwestern Healthcare Research Institute, Northwestern University, University of Chicago, and University of Illinois at Chicago, headed by Dr. Alan Sanders, are attempting to determine whether one or more genes are responsible for the development of male sexual orientation.

So let me highlight the problems:

The Study’s Agenda
The report revealed Dr. Alan Sanders’ agenda — as he admitted on camera, how this study could change attitudes and tolerance toward homosexuality. First and foremost — a true scientific method attempts to minimize the influence of bias or prejudice in the experimenter when testing an hypothesis or a theory. Why wasn’t Dr. Sanders challenged on this?

This point — changing attitudes — was later highlighted and lauded by WGN anchorman Steve Sanders.

Morality
Twelve seconds of this 4 minute segment was given to AFTAH’s Peter LaBarbera for the “other side” of the debate — quickly glancing over the moral objections of homosexual behavior. No conservative-leaning scientists were interviewed. The coverage was not fair — and it certainly was not balanced.